Proposed Conversion of Out-farm to Dwelling House

Green Cowden Farm, Bakewell

Planning, Design & Access, and Heritage Statement

November 2019

## Contents

| Section | Page | |-----------------------|------| | Introduction | 3 | | The Application | 4 | | Site & Surroundings | 5 | | Policy Framework | 9 | | Analysis | 12 | | Conclusion | 16 |

1. Introduction

This Planning, Design & Access, and Heritage Statement supports an application for the development of a new dwelling house through the conversion of a nineteenth century out-farm at Green Cowden Farm, Bakewell.

The application is also supported by plans produced by Darrington Architects, and a protected species survey by Dunelm Ecology. The Application

The application is for the conversion of a nineteenth century out-farm into a 3 No. bedroom dwelling house. The out-farm consists of two buildings, one single storey and one two storey, interconnected but set at 90 degrees to each other. The house would be served by the existing access track from Green Cowden Farm.

The proposals would provide open plan living space on the ground floor of the two storey barn with a bedroom, shower room, study and utility within the single storey structure. At first floor there would be two further bedrooms and two ensuite bathrooms.

The layout has been formed to use existing or former openings wherever possible. Only one entirely new window opening would be added on the northwest facing elevation. 3 No. new arrow slits would be added (2 No. on the northwest facing elevation and 1 No. on the Southeast facing elevation). These would serve bathrooms and would avoid the need for obtrusive roof lights on the most prominent roof slopes. Arrow slits are already an existing elevational feature of the building. Two small roof lights would be added to the southwest facing roof slope of the single storey building. This elevation is entirely screened from view by planting. Access to a barn owl nesting box would be provided on the SE facing roof slope.

The north east facing gable has been rebuilt at some point in the past and already had a large, modern opening added. This is supported by a steel lintel. The proposed plans aim to increase the height of this opening so that it can used to light a first floor bedroom, and to add a new stone header. The opening would be glazed to maximize natural light into the living space at first and second floor.

The curtilage of the proposed dwelling has been kept limited to the south east facing elevation, with a parking area on the existing concrete pad to the north east. The curtilage would be demarcated with a timber post and rail fence to match the existing fencing around the site and the woodland. 2. Site & Surroundings

Site

Green Cowden Farm is a complex of both traditional and modern farm buildings located off the Monyash Road (B5055) approximately 1.75km west of Bakewell. It sits immediately adjacent to another farm, Little Cowden, and shares an access drive off Monyash Road. Green Cowden was a working farm operated from the listed farm house until early 2019. The land is now managed from Ashford Hall Farm.

The application site lies approximately 330m further west of Green Cowden Farm along an established access track that has been in situ since at least 1972 (it is shown on OS maps from that date). The site is bounded to its west by a woodland strip but is otherwise open to fields.

The site is not in a Conservation Area and, although in the same ownership as the listed farmhouse, it cannot be said to directly impact upon its setting due to intervening distance, topography and buildings. The site is in flood risk zone 1.

Despite the addition of the large gable opening to allow access by some machinery, the buildings are generally unsuitable for modern farming. A modern farm building lies approximately 300m to the east of the outfarm and is more appropriate for modern land management and agricultural uses. Conversion is therefore required in order to facilitate the long term use and maintenance of the buildings, which would otherwise fall into disrepair.

Other uses such as holiday accommodation have been considered. However, it is considered that unencumbered dwelling houses have the ability to derive more benefits for local communities, such as increasing school roles and church congregations, supporting local services and providing greater support for community activities. It is also more likely that permanent residents will spend money in the local economy over a longer period of time e.g. at local shops than short stay tourists who may bring their own provisions for a self-catering weekend break.

Fig 1: Site viewed from the east

Fig 2: site viewed from the west Evolution of the site

The site is listed on the Historic Environment Record as an outfarm (MDR18789) and it is first shown on the 1878-79 Ordnance Survey maps of the area. There is no tithe map of this area so no cartographic evidence of any earlier development exists. The HER describes the site as an extant, 19th century outfarm. No further details are held by Derbyshire County Council.

The main farm complex dates from the early nineteenth century and so it is highly likely that the existing outfarm arrangement of buildings is contemporary with the main farm grouping, although evidence suggests that part of the outfarm may be older (see below). The farmhouse is grade II listed and the attached farm buildings are considered to be curtilage listed by virtue of their physical attachment to the farmhouse.

Detailed Description of the Buildings to be Converted

The site consists of a two storey barn oriented northeast to southwest, and a single storey barn oriented northwest to southeast. They are connected at the SW facing gable of the larger barn. An internal doorway exists between the barns at this point to allow access between the two.

The outfarm is constructed of randomly coursed rubble limestone. The single storey element has some gritstone quoins, but these are absent from the two storey element. Door and window openings have tooled gritstone headers and sills, with the exception of the large opening in the north east facing gable which has a steel lintel. This gable is constructed of breeze blocks faced in stone and has obviously been rebuilt during the twentieth century.

The stable door in the single storey element’s north east facing elevation has full gritstone surrounds. The single storey element has an arrow slit in both gables.

Three doorways have been blocked up over time: one in the north west facing single storey gable, one in the centre of the north west facing two storey elevation, and one in the south east facing, two storey elevation.

The two storey barn is roofed in stone slates, whereas the single storey barn roof is covered in blue slate.

Internally the buildings are not sub-divided, and roof structures are exposed. Floors are concrete and there are concrete and steel cattle stalls in both sections of the building. The roofs are constructed of traditional timber trusses which appear in good order and may be replacements for earlier structures. The stone slate covering of the two storey barn is failing in some places, leading to water ingress. All stonework appears sound. External Photographs

Fig 3: North east elevation

Fig 4: North west elevation

Fig 5: South east elevation

Fig 6: South west elevation

Internal Photographs

Fig 5: Interior of 2 storey barn

Fig 6: Roof structure of 2 storey barn Surroundings

The site is in open countryside. The surrounding land is a mixture of agricultural grazing land, hay meadows and woodland belts. There are no public rights of way passing close to the site and no public vantage points from where the building can clearly be seen. The nearest neighbouring properties are Green Cowden Farm and Little Cowden Farm, both 330m east. Bole Hill Farm Cottages are 1km to the west. Burton Manor is 1km southeast.

Sites around Bole Hill 1km west of the application site are archaeologically significant. A former open cast fluorspar mine exists to the south.

Planning History

There have been no recent planning applications on the site. 3. Policy Framework

National Policy

The National Planning Policy Framework – February 2019

At the heart of the Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development (para 10). Paragraph 11 goes on to say that:

- local planning authorities should positively seek opportunities to meet the development needs of their area and be sufficiently flexible to adapt to rapid change;
- Local Plans should meet objectively assessed needs, unless:
  - the application of policies in the Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a strong reason for restricting the overall scale, type or distribution of development in the plan area; or
  - any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole.

For decision-taking this means:

- approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and
- where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting permission unless:
  - the application of policies in this Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed
  - any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole.

Isolated new homes in the countryside should be avoided unless the development would represent the optimal viable use of a heritage asset and would reuse redundant or disused buildings and enhance its immediate setting (Para 79).

Paragraph 109 states that development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.

Paragraph 127 states that planning policies and decisions should ensure that developments (inter alia) add to the overall quality of the area; are visually attractive; are sympathetic to local character and history, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate change (such as increased densities); and establish or maintain a strong sense of place.

Great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks (para 172). Paragraph 175 states that permission should be refused where they may result in significant harm to biodiversity which cannot be avoided, adequately mitigated or compensated for. When determining application affecting heritage assets, local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. The level of detail should be proportionate to the asset’s importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance (para 189). Great weight should be given to an asset’s conservation (para 193). Any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification (para 194). Were a proposal will lead to a less than substantial harm to the significance of an asset, the harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal (para 196).

**Peak District National Park Core Strategy (2011)**

Policy GSP1 restates the Sandford Principle and that conservation and enhancement of the National park is priority. Policy GSP2 encourages opportunities for enhancement of the valued characteristics of the National Park.

Policy GSP3 sets out the key development management principles including impact on character and setting of buildings; scale of development; siting, landscape and materials; design in accordance with the Design Guide; impact on access; and impact on living conditions.

Policy L1 states that development must conserve and enhance valued landscape character. Policy L2 states that development must conserve and enhance sites, features or species of biodiversity importance; and that development will not be permitted where it is likely to have an adverse impact on any sites, features or species of biodiversity importance that have statutory protection.

Policy L3 requires heritage assets to be conserved and where appropriate enhanced. Development will not be permitted where it would cause harm to the significance of the asset.

HC1 is the main policy of relevance to housing development. It states that provision will not be made for housing solely to meet open market demand. Exceptionally new housing can be accepted where (inter alia), in accordance with policies GSP1 and GSP2 it is required in order to achieve conservation and/or enhancement of valued vernacular or listed buildings.

**Development Management Policies May 2019**

Development Management Policies were formally adopted by the Authority on 24 May 2019 and now replace the previously saved policies of the Local Plan 2001.

DMC1 states that development which would not respect, would adversely affect, or would lead to undesirable changes in landscape character or any other valued characteristics of the site and the area will not be permitted.

Policy DMC3 deals with considerations relating to the siting, design, layout and landscaping of new developments. The policy requires detailed treatment of a high standard that respects, protects and where possible enhances the natural beauty, quality and visual amenity of the landscape, including the wildlife and cultural heritage that contribute to the distinctive sense of place. It also requires consideration of access, utility services, vehicle parking, siting of services, refuse bins and cycle storage in new developments, as well as visual context in relation to the landscape character of the area. DMC5 sets out how to assess the impact of development on heritage assets and their settings. Planning applications for development affecting a heritage asset, its setting and their significance must clearly demonstrate in a Heritage Statement: (i) how these will be conserved and where possible enhanced; and (ii) why the proposed development and related works are desirable or necessary. The Heritage Statement must be proportionate to the significance of the asset. It may be included as part of the Design and Access Statement where relevant.

The supporting text to policy DMC6 states:

*In some circumstances, housing development can assist in conservation and/or enhancement of previously developed sites and heritage assets. In an area where people’s assets often include land and buildings this offers scope for communities to provide housing for those who, whilst not in housing need, nevertheless want to remain or move into a community... However, the outcome of such development must be the conservation and enhancement of the National Park.*

Policy DMC10 refers to the conversion of heritage assets (both designated and non-designated) and provides the link to Core Strategy HC1C. Under this policy an application for housing under HC1C will be acceptable in principle if the Authority considers the building to be a non-designated heritage asset based upon the evidence provided (DMC10B), and where it can be demonstrated that conversion to a market dwelling is required in order to achieve the conservation and, where appropriate, the enhancement of the significance of the heritage asset and the contribution of its setting. The policy states that attention will be paid to the extent of domestication that is proposed including providing safe access and adequate amenity space.

The policy also states in general terms that conversion of a heritage asset will be permitted provided that: (i) it can accommodate the new use without changes that adversely affect its character; and (ii) the building is capable of conversion, the extent of which would not compromise the significance and character of the building; and (iii) the changes brought about by the new use, and any associated infrastructure (such as access and services), conserves or enhances the heritage significance of the asset, its setting (in accordance with policy DMC5), any valued landscape character, and any valued built environment.

DMC11 relates to nature conservation interests. It requires proposals to aim for net gains in terms of biodiversity. It seeks consideration of enhancement, avoidance of adverse effects, an assessment of alternative sites, mitigation, and, in rare cases, compensation measures to offset loss. Adequate assessments must be submitted with development proposals. DMC12 C states that permission will only be granted where significant harm can be avoided, and the benefits of the development outweigh any adverse effect.

**Peak District National Park Farmsteads Assessment Framework 2017**

This informal guidance, not adopted as SPD, provides an approach to consider the potential for change of traditional farmsteads and their buildings. It sets out the steps to be taken in determining whether new uses can be found for redundant buildings whilst conserving and enhancing heritage asset value. 4. Analysis

Historical Significance of the Barns

The NPPF requires the significance of any heritage assets affected by a planning application to be described. It states that the level of detail should be proportionate to the asset’s importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance (para 189). In this case the buildings are not listed but are within a Conservation Area.

Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance for the Sustainable Management of the Historic Environment (Historic England 2008) identifies four categories of heritage value, namely evidential, historic, aesthetic and communal.

This relates to the potential of the buildings and site to yield primary evidence about past activity.

The buildings are of traditional design and construction. They are shown on the first OS maps in 1878, but as the main farm has been dated back to the early nineteenth century, it is likely that the outfarm as it exists today is contemporary with that.

Evidence suggests that the single storey element may pre-date the larger two storey section. The connection between the two sections is awkward with the larger barn effectively being built into its smaller neighbour.

The construction of the two sections is also subtly different, with gritstone quoins and door surrounds being used in the smaller barn and arrow slits inserted into the gables. The internal connection between the two may have been dictated by a pre-existing opening in the smaller barn. Any original stone lintel has since been replaced by steel. Internally, all floors have been replaced with concrete so little evidence remains of former use.

Historical Value

This relates to the ways in which the present can be connected through a place to past people, events and aspects of life.

The site is agricultural in nature and the current grouping was obviously designed to facilitate farming. It is likely that the smaller section was an existing field barn which was enlarged once the main farm developed at Green Cowden. The simple built form of the buildings and the use of local materials and construction traditions reflect the history of the site. This in turn tells us about the livelihoods of past occupants.

Aesthetic Value

This is concerned with the value deriving from the ways in which people draw sensory and intellectual stimulation from a place.

The outfarm follows the building traditions of local vernacular buildings in terms of its materials, proportions and roof pitches. The large opening in the north east gable is poorly proportioned, having been inserted presumably to allow larger vehicles to enter the buildings once mechanisation was introduced. It is, however, an intrinsic part of the building’s development and reflects the changing nature of agriculture in the area. As such, it is not detrimental to the value of the buildings.

Communal Value

Communal value is defined as the meanings of a place for the people who relate to it or for whom it figures in the collective experience or memory.

Given the lack of public vantage points from where the outfarm can be seen, most communal value is likely to be derived by current and previous owners and those who have worked at Green Cowden Farm.

Conclusion

The buildings have significance and are listed on the HER. They are of traditional form, massing and materials. The smaller barn in particular displays some evidence of a building that has been constructed to a relatively high standard at some point in the past. The overall form and development of the building group reflects the site’s agricultural past.

Historic Significance - Impact Assessment

The proposals to convert the barns to a dwelling will have minor impact on the external elevations through the addition of a window to the north west elevation and three new arrow slits. However, the proportions of the new window have been designed to match existing openings exactly. There are already arrow slits in the single storey element of the outfarm and so new openings of this nature will not look out of place. The arrow slits also avoid the need for rooflights. There are no proposals to extend or significantly alter the floorplans of the existing buildings. The proposals therefore comply in this respect with Development Management policy DMC10.

There is enhancement on offer in terms of repairing the buildings, particularly the roof coverings, and reopening former apertures currently crudely blocked up. The magnitude of change in terms of the external appearance of the buildings is therefore negligible.

The interiors of the barns retain no significant features of historic interest and the sensitivity to change is therefore low. The ground floor of the larger barn will be open plan and will therefore retain the current feeling of open space and an ability to understand the building’s former layout. A new floor structure will be inserted to allow the insertion of first floor rooms, and a new staircase will lead up to it. This will have minor impact on the building’s original fabric as some stonework will be removed and some will be concealed to insert the necessary structures necessary to support the new floor and to comply with Building Regulations.

The single storey section of barn will be subdivided with no loss of historic fabric. The roof structure could remain exposed in some parts of this section, e.g. bedroom 1, to enable rafters to be seen and the historic building fabric to be appreciated.

Although the proposed use is not what the buildings were built for, it will ensure their long term maintenance. This benefit is recognised by Development Management Policy DMC6 which states that housing development can assist in conservation and enhancement of heritage assets. Overall, the impact on the significance of the outfarm as a whole is likely to be minor and represents less than substantial harm to a heritage asset. The public benefits of the proposal include ensuring the long-term retention and maintenance of the asset and the provision of policy compliant housing within the National Park. The proposals therefore comply with paragraph 196 of the NPPF.

In terms of mitigating any minor impacts, a historic building recording of the barn to Historic England’s Level 2 standard could be conditioned. Given that the buildings are not listed, this would be a proportionate mitigation response that would ensure compliance with Core Strategy policy L3.

**Principle of Conversion to an Open Market Dwelling**

The foregoing has demonstrated that the buildings are valued vernacular and non-designated heritage assets, being an example of a nineteenth century outfarm which may have earlier origins, built in a traditional style with local materials. The proposals will not have an adverse impact on the landscape of the National Park and offer enhancement to the character and appearance of the area, compliant with policies GSP1 and GSP2 of the Core Strategy.

Given that the buildings are no longer associated with a working farm, the impetus of open market housing values are required in order to ensure the long term maintenance and survival of the buildings which would otherwise be at risk of neglect or decay, and so that they can be enjoyed by future generations (NPPF paras 184 & 185). Aside from the obvious maintenance benefits, dwelling houses are a more appropriate use where future residents can contribute to the vitality and viability of the settlement and the services it provides in a more meaningful way than short term holiday lets could.

Although the NPPF seeks to avoid isolated new homes in the countryside, concessions are made where the development would reuse redundant buildings and be the optimum viable use of a heritage asset. In this case, therefore, the outfarm’s relatively remote setting is not necessarily a barrier to its conversion to a dwelling house given that it will guarantee the outfarm’s long term survival and there will be no adverse landscape impact as a result of the proposals.

The principle of the conversion of the buildings to an open market dwelling house is therefore acceptable under policy HC1 of the Core Strategy and Development Management policy DMC10, subject to there being no other material considerations that indicate otherwise.

**Landscape Impact**

The barns are in an isolated location within open countryside. However, their reuse will have little impact on the character and appearance of the National Park’s landscape as, unusually, the outfarm and its access track are not visible from any public vantage points.

It is common for proposals for barn conversions in open countryside to raise concerns relating to the overt domestication of the site and its impact upon the character of the landscape. However, in this case, the buildings and the proposed small curtilage will not be seen from anywhere with public accessibility. There will be no need for a new access track, hardstanding or extensions to the building and so there are no concerns about potentially adverse landscape impact. The proposals therefore comply with paragraph 172 of the NPPF; policies L1 and GSP2 of the Core Strategy; and policies DMC1 and DMC3 of the Development Management Policies.

**Impact on Amenity**

The barns sit 330m away from the nearest neighbouring residential property. There will be no overlooking, and the use is unlikely to generate undue noise and disturbance. Two off-street parking spaces are proposed as part of the application and will be located on an existing hard standing to the north east. The proposals therefore comply with Core Strategy policy GSP3 and Development Management policies DMC1 and DMC3.

**Highways**

The existing access to Green Cowden Farm is shared with Little Cowden Farm. Visibility from the main access track onto Monyash Road is good. The additional traffic movements generated from a single 3 bedroom dwelling house will not be sufficient to compromise the safe operation of the highway network.

The proposals therefore comply with NPPF paragraph 109, policy GSP3 of the Core Strategy and Development Management policies DMC1 and DMC3.

**Protected Species**

The outfarm has been fully surveyed for both bats and birds. Although no evidence of roosting bats was found, the barn does have some potential for bat roosting due to wall crevices. This means that precautionary measure will need to be taken during construction works.

Both Barn Owls and Little Owls were identified as roosting in the building. The Barn Owls are using a nesting box in the two storey section, with Little Owls using the single storey barn. Mitigatory habitat in the form of a Barn Owl nesting box is proposed with access through the SE roof slope (consistent with where the owls are accessing the barn at present). Construction works should only take place between September and February and only after a detailed search of the buildings has identified no owls.

Assuming adequate care is taken during the construction phase, and the mitigation proposals set out in Dunelm Ecology’s report are included in the final scheme, the impact on owls can be adequately mitigated in accordance with paragraph 175 of the NPPF, policy L2 of the Core Strategy and policies DMC11 and DMC12 (C) of the Development Management Policies.

**Structural Condition**

The general structure of the buildings is sound and there would be no significant demolition required to facilitate the conversion. The buildings are therefore capable of conversion, complaint with policy DMC10, and there will be no significant impact upon the external character or appearance of them as a result. 5. Conclusion

The proposals represent an opportunity to bring back into use these significant and valued vernacular buildings to ensure the long term survival of a heritage asset. The proposals ensure that there will be minimal alteration to the external elevations of the barns and that they will be enhanced.

There will be no loss of any significant features within the outfarm as the buildings have already had concrete floors and cattle stalls inserted, so their sensitivity to change is low. A full record of the existing interiors of the unlisted structures can be conditioned to mitigate any minor impact on significance.

The proposed use as an open market dwelling house is acceptable in principle and the use could operate without any impact on the residential amenity of existing neighbours or future occupiers of the site.

The proposals can be safely accessed from the highway network, and no new tracks would be required. Parking standards can be met and all vehicles can leave the site in a forward gear.

Owls currently roost in the barn and mitigation measures would therefore be put in place to avoid disturbance during the nesting season, and that offer a compensatory nesting site for barn owls in the final scheme.

Overall the proposals will enhance the valued characteristics of the National Park and will ensure the future maintenance of the outfarm.

As the proposals comply with policy at both a national and local level, paragraph 11 of the NPPF suggests that permission should be granted without delay.